Revised SRFI-76 (R6RS Records) draft
Donovan Kolbly
(02 Jan 2006 14:54 UTC)
|
Re: Revised SRFI-76 (R6RS Records) draft Taylor Campbell (02 Jan 2006 16:28 UTC)
|
Re: Revised SRFI-76 (R6RS Records) draft
Michael Sperber
(03 Jan 2006 17:04 UTC)
|
Re: Revised SRFI-76 (R6RS Records) draft
Taylor Campbell
(03 Jan 2006 21:00 UTC)
|
Re: Revised SRFI-76 (R6RS Records) draft
Michael Sperber
(04 Jan 2006 18:19 UTC)
|
Need to avoid breaking abstractions? Then *DON'T*.
bear
(10 Jan 2006 18:12 UTC)
|
Re: Revised SRFI-76 (R6RS Records) draft
Per Bothner
(03 Jan 2006 21:05 UTC)
|
Re: Revised SRFI-76 (R6RS Records) draft Taylor Campbell 02 Jan 2006 16:28 UTC
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 08:53:59 -0600 (CST) From: Donovan Kolbly <xxxxxx@rscheme.org> - The syntactic form has been renamed to DEFINE-RECORD-TYPE, with other renames in its wake. I think this is a very bad idea. I will never use this SRFI, for its excessive & unnecessary overcomplexity & overengineering, but it would be very annoying for it to break all code that uses SRFI 9 by usurping the name DEFINE-RECORD-TYPE. I'd suggest DEFINE-RECORD-TYPE* (though I already use my own (very much simpler) macro called that), DEFINE-COMPLEX-RECORD-TYPE, or something along those lines.